4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen

1
Using Rubrics to Grade, Assess, and Improve Student Learning
Strengthening Our Roots: Quality, Opportunity & Success Professional Development Day
Miami-Dade College
March 7, 2014
Mary J. Allen, mallen@csub.edu
Academic Program Assessment
Assessment is an on-going process designed to monitor and improve student learning. Faculty:
 develop explicit statements of what students should learn (student learning outcomes)
 require students to perform each outcome
 assess how well students performed each outcome
 use results to improve student learning of each outcome (close the loop)
Assessing the Evidence
 usually involves subjective judgments concerning complex products or behaviors
 rubrics provide the criteria to guide these subjective judgments
Rubrics
Rubrics provide the criteria for assessing students' work. They can be used to assess virtually any
product or behavior, such as essays, research reports, portfolios, works of art, recitals, oral
presentations, performances, and group activities. Judgments can be self-assessments by
students; or judgments can be made by others, such as faculty, other students, fieldwork
supervisors, and external reviewers. Rubrics can be used to clarify expectations to students, to
provide formative feedback to students, to grade students, and/or to assess courses and programs.
There are two major types of rubrics:
 Holistic rubric — one global, holistic score for a product or behavior
 Analytic rubric — separate, holistic scoring of specified characteristics of a product or
behavior
Rubric Examples
 Campus Examples
 VALUE Rubrics (Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education; AAC&U)

2
The rubric communicates what the outcome really means
because it specifies the criteria for assessing its mastery.
Criterion-Referenced Judgments
Rubrics are criterion-referenced, rather than norm-referenced. Raters ask, “Did the student meet
the criteria for level 4 of the rubric?” rather than “How well did this student do compared to
other students?” This is more compatible with cooperative and collaborative learning
environments than competitive grading schemes and is essential when using rubrics for program
assessment because you want to learn how well students have met your standards.
Creating a Rubric
1. Adapt an already-existing rubric.
2. Analytic Method
Drafting a Rubric
I generally find it easier to start at the extremes when drafting the criteria in the rubric's cells,
then move up and down to draft the levels in the middle. Starting at the lowest and highest cells,
you ask:
 What are the characteristics of an unacceptable product, the worst product you could
imagine, a product that results when students are very weak on the outcome being assessed?
 What are the characteristics of a product that would be exemplary, that would exceed your
expectations, that would result when the student is an expert on the outcome being assessed?
Some words I find helpful:
(in)complete, (in)accurate, (un)reasonable, detailed, thorough, creative, original, subtle,
sophisticated, synthesizes, integrates, analyzes, minor/major conceptual errors, flexibility,
adaptability, complexity of thought, clarity, well-documented, well-supported, professional,
organized, insightful, relevant

3
Rubric Criteria
Say you are drafting a holistic rubric to assess students' command of basic grammar and
punctuation. Look at these four examples. Which do you prefer? Why?
Version 1
Does Not Meet
Expectations
Needs Improvement Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations
10 or more errors 5-12 errors 2-7 errors 0-1 error
Version 2
Does Not Meet
Expectations
10 or more errors 5-9 errors 2-4 errors 0-1 error
Version 3
Does Not Meet
Expectations
lowest 10%; more
errors than 90% of
the other students
bottom half; more
errors than the average
student, but not in the
bottom 10%
top half; fewer errors
than the average
student, but not in the
top 10%
top 10%; fewer errors
than 90% of the
students
Version 4
Does Not Meet
Expectations
errors frequently
interfere with
reader's ability to
understand meaning
many errors or
occasional errors that
interfere with reader's
ability to understand
meaning
contains a few errors,
but they do not
interfere with reader's
ability to understand
meaning
virtually free of errors

4
Example: Group Collaboration Rubric
Outcome: Students can collaborate effectively in groups.
When the faculty discussed this outcome, they decided that students should be able to clearly
communicate their ideas with others, show respect for others' ideas, and do their fair share of the
work.
Group Collaboration Rubric
Dimension
Rating Category
1
below
expectations
2
needs
improvement
3
meets
expectations
4
exceeds
expectations
clearly
communicate
own ideas
respect others'
ideas
do fair share
of the work
Rubrics across the Curriculum
Learning outcomes specify what students can do to demonstrate their learning. Students
master learning outcomes by practicing them repeatedly and receiving feedback to help
them improve.
What would happen if your students were given feedback on the same writing rubric for
every paper they wrote in your curriculum or the same speaking rubric for every
presentation they made in your curriculum?

5
Adapting Assessment Rubrics for Grading
Here’s an assessment rubric—an analytic rubric with
three dimensions for assessing oral presentation skills.
Rubric for Assessing Oral Presentations
Below
Expectation
Needs
Improvement
Satisfactory Exceeds
Expectations
Organization No apparent
organization.
Evidence is not
used to support
assertions.
There is some
organization, but
the speaker
occasionally goes
off topic.
Evidence used to
support
conclusions is
weak.
The presentation
has a focus and
provides some
reasonable
evidence to
support
conclusions.
The presentation is
carefully
organized and
provides
convincing
evidence to
support
conclusions.
Content The content is
inaccurate or
overly general.
Listeners are
unlikely to learn
anything or may
be misled.
The content is
sometimes
inaccurate or
incomplete.
Listeners may
learn some
isolated facts, but
they are unlikely
to gain new
insights about the
topic.
The content is
generally
accurate and
reasonably
complete.
Listeners may
develop a few
insights about
the topic.
The content is
accurate and
comprehensive.
Listeners are likely
to gain new
insights about the
topic.
Delivery The speaker
appears anxious
and uncomfortable
and reads notes,
rather than speaks.
Listeners are
ignored.
The speaker
occasionally
appears anxious
or uncomfortable,
and may
occasionally read
notes, rather than
speak. Listeners
are often ignored
or misunderstood.
The speaker is
generally
relaxed and
comfortable.
Listeners are
generally
recognized and
understood.
The speaker is
professional,
relaxed, and
comfortable and
interacts
effectively with
listeners.

6
Alternative Format 1.
Points are assigned and used for grading, as shown below, and the categories (Below
Expectation, Needs Improvement, Satisfactory, Exemplary) can be used for assessment. Faculty
might assign points in different ways, depending on the nature of their courses or decide to add
more rows for course-specific criteria or comments. Notice how this rubric allows faculty, who
may not be experts on oral presentation skills, to give detailed formative feedback to students.
This feedback describes present skills and indicates what students should do to improve.
Effective rubrics can help faculty reduce the time they spend grading and eliminate the need to
repeatedly write the same comments to multiple students.
Rubric for Grading Oral Presentations
Below
Expectation
Needs
Improvement
Expectations
Score
organization.
Evidence is not
used to support
assertions.
(0-6)
There is some
organization, but
the speaker
occasionally goes
off topic. Evidence
used to support
conclusions is
weak.
(7-9)
The presentation
has a focus and
provides some
reasonable
evidence to
support
conclusions.
(10-12)
The presentation is
carefully organized
and provides
convincing
evidence to support
conclusions.
(13-15)
inaccurate or
overly general.
Listeners are
unlikely to learn
anything or may
be misled.
(0-4)
The content is
sometimes
inaccurate or
incomplete.
Listeners may learn
some isolated facts,
but they are
unlikely to gain
new insights about
the topic.
(5-6)
The content is
generally
accurate and
reasonably
complete.
Listeners may
develop a few
insights about the
topic.
(7-8)
The content is
accurate and
comprehensive.
to gain new
insights about the
topic.
(9-10)
appears anxious
and
uncomfortable
and reads notes,
rather than
speaks. Listeners
are ignored.
(0-11)
The speaker
occasionally
appears anxious or
uncomfortable, and
may occasionally
read notes, rather
than speak.
Listeners are often
ignored or
misunderstood.
(12-17)
The speaker is
generally relaxed
and comfortable.
Listeners are
generally
recognized and
understood.
(18-21)
The speaker is
professional,
relaxed, and
comfortable and
interacts
effectively with
listeners.
(22-25)
Total Score

7
Weights are used for grading; categories (Below Expectation, Needs Improvement, Satisfactory,
Exemplary) can be used for assessment. Individual faculty determine how to assign weights for
their course grading. Faculty may circle or underline material in the cells to emphasize criteria
that were particularly important during the assessment/grading, and they may add a section for
comments or other grading criteria.
Rubric for Grading Oral Presentations
Below
Expectation
Needs
Improvement
Expectations
Weight
organization.
Evidence is not
used to support
assertions.
There is some
organization, but
the speaker
occasionally goes
off topic. Evidence
used to support
conclusions is
weak.
The presentation
has a focus and
provides some
reasonable
evidence to
support
conclusions.
The presentation is
carefully organized
and provides
convincing
evidence to support
conclusions.
30%
inaccurate or
overly general.
Listeners are
unlikely to
learn anything
or may be
misled.
The content is
sometimes
inaccurate or
incomplete.
Listeners may learn
but they are
unlikely to gain new
insights about the
topic.
The content is
generally
accurate and
reasonably
complete.
Listeners may
develop a few
insights about
the topic.
The content is
accurate and
comprehensive.
to gain new
insights about the
topic.
20%
appears anxious
and
uncomfortable
and reads notes,
rather than
speaks.
Listeners are
ignored.
The speaker
occasionally
appears anxious or
uncomfortable, and
may occasionally
read notes, rather
than speak.
Listeners are often
ignored or
misunderstood.
The speaker is
generally
relaxed and
comfortable.
Listeners are
generally
recognized and
understood.
The speaker is
professional,
relaxed, and
comfortable and
interacts effectively
with listeners.
50%
Comments

8
Some faculty prefer to grade holistically, rather than through assigning numbers. In this example,
the faculty member checks off characteristics of the speech and determines the grade based on a
holistic judgment. The categories (Below Expectation, Needs Improvement, Satisfactory,
Exemplary) can be used for assessment.
Below Expectation Needs Improvement Satisfactory Exceeds
Expectations
Organization o No apparent
organization.
o Evidence is not
used to support
assertions.
o There is some
organization, but
the speaker
occasionally goes
off topic.
o Evidence used to
support
conclusions is
weak.
o The presentation
has a focus.
o Student provides
some reasonable
evidence to
support
conclusions.
o The presentation
is carefully
organized.
o Speaker provides
convincing
evidence to
support
conclusions.
Content o The content is
inaccurate or
overly general.
o Listeners are
unlikely to learn
anything or may
be misled.
o The content is
sometimes
inaccurate or
incomplete.
o Listeners may learn
but they are
unlikely to gain
new insights about
the topic.
o The content is
generally
accurate and
reasonably
complete.
o Listeners may
develop a few
insights about the
topic.
o The content is
accurate and
comprehensive
o Listeners are
likely to gain new
insights about the
topic.
Delivery o The speaker
appears anxious
and
uncomfortable
and reads notes,
rather than
speaks.
o Listeners are
ignored.
o The speaker
occasionally
appears anxious or
uncomfortable, and
may occasionally
read notes, rather
than speak.
o Listeners are often
ignored or
misunderstood.
o The speaker is
generally relaxed
and comfortable.
o Listeners are
generally
recognized and
understood.
o The speaker is
professional,
relaxed, and
comfortable.
o The speaker
interacts
effectively with
listeners.
Comments

9
Combinations of Various Ideas. As long as the twelve assessment cells are used in the same way
by all faculty, grading and assessment can be done simultaneously. Additional criteria for
grading can be added, as shown below.
Below
Expectation
Needs
Improvement
Expectations
Weight
Organization o No apparent
organization.
o Evidence is not
used to support
assertions.
o There is some
organization, but
the speaker
occasionally goes
off topic.
o Evidence used to
support
conclusions is
weak.
o The
presentation
has a focus.
o Student
provides some
reasonable
evidence to
support
conclusions.
o The
presentation is
carefully
organized.
o Speaker
provides
convincing
evidence to
support
conclusions.
30%
Content o The content is
inaccurate or
overly general.
o Listeners are
unlikely to
learn anything
or may be
misled.
o The content is
sometimes
inaccurate or
incomplete.
o Listeners may
learn some
isolated facts, but
they are unlikely
to gain new
insights about the
topic.
o The content is
generally
accurate and
reasonably
complete.
o Listeners may
develop a few
insights about
the topic.
o The content is
accurate and
comprehensive
o Listeners are
likely to gain
new insights
about the topic.
20%
Delivery o The speaker
appears
anxious and
uncomfortable
and reads
notes, rather
than speaks.
o Listeners are
ignored.
o The speaker
occasionally
appears anxious or
uncomfortable,
and may
occasionally read
notes, rather than
speak.
o Listeners are often
ignored or
misunderstood.
o The speaker is
generally
relaxed and
comfortable.
o Listeners are
generally
recognized and
understood.
o The speaker is
professional,
relaxed, and
comfortable.
o The speaker
interacts
effectively with
listeners.
40%
References o Speaker fails to
integrate
relevant
journal articles
into the
speech.
o Speaker integrates
1 or 2 relevant
journal articles
into the speech.
o Speaker
integrates 3 or
4 journal
relevant
articles into the
speech.
o Speaker
integrates 5 or
more relevant
journal articles
into the speech.
10%

10
Grading Using One of the Above Rubrics
1. Every student receives explicit feedback on at least three major dimensions of speaking. They
learn what they are doing well and what they need to improve.
2. Faculty can grade students rapidly as students give their presentations.
3. Students can give quick feedback to their peers who give presentations.
4. If students give subsequent presentations, they (and you) can track improvements.
5. Combining student data on each dimension allows you to identify which aspects of the
outcome students are achieving and which they are not achieving at the level you expect. This
allows you to decide where to put more focus when you address this outcome again.
Rubrics Can:
 Speed up grading
 Clarify expectations to students; students learn more when your expectations are clear to them
 Reduce student grade complaints
 Help faculty create better assignments that ensure that students display what you want them to
demonstrate
 Help faculty tailor instruction to meet students' identified needs
Suggestions for Using Rubrics in Courses
1. Grade using a rubric. Hand out the grading rubric with the assignment so students will know
your expectations and how they'll be graded. Spend time with your students discussing the
rubric before they do their work.
2. Integrate rubrics into lectures and course activities, such as reviewing the Civic Engagement
VALUE rubric when discussing community service learning or internship requirements.
3. Develop a rubric with your students for an assignment, such as a group project. Students can
then monitor themselves and their peers using agreed-upon criteria that they helped develop.
Many faculty find that students create higher standards for themselves than faculty would
impose on them.
4. Have students apply your rubric to some sample products before they create their own.
Faculty report that students are quite accurate when doing this, and this process should help
them evaluate their own products as they are being developed. The ability to evaluate, edit,
and improve draft documents is an important skill.
5. Have students exchange paper drafts and give peer feedback using the rubric, then give
students a few days before the final drafts are turned in to you. You might also require that
they turn in the draft and scored rubric with their final paper.
6. Have students self-assess their products using the grading rubric and hand in the self-
assessment with the product; then faculty and students can compare self- and faculty-
generated evaluations.

11
Ideas to Consider
1. Collaborate with colleagues to develop rubrics for your program learning outcomes. Use
program assessment to improve students' learning opportunities.
2. Work with colleagues to integrate assessment rubrics across your curriculum.
3. Adapt assessment rubrics for grading in your courses. This aligns your courses with
expectations for students who complete your program and allows you to identify areas that
need further attention in your courses.
4. Integrate rubrics into courses:
a. share grading rubrics with students before they do their work
b. integrate rubrics into lectures or activities
c. develop rubrics with your students
d. have students apply rubrics to sample products
e. have students provide peer feedback using rubrics
f. have students self-assess using rubrics
Wrap-Up
1. What did you learn from this session?
2. What successes have you had with rubrics?
3. What problems have you faced with rubrics? How did you resolve the problems?
4. What questions remain?

12
Appendix of Rubric Examples*
Writing Rubric (Johnson Community College) 13
Writing Rubric (Roanoke College) 14
Writing Rubric (Northeastern Illinois University) 15
Scoring Guide for Integrative Science (Fresno State University) 16
Research Project Rubric 17
Levels of Investigation (Bowling Green University) 18
Levels of Presentation (Bowling Green University) 19
Holistic Critical Thinking Rubric (Portland State University) 20
Critical Thinking Rubric (Northeastern Illinois University) 22
Information Competence (CA State University) 23
Collaboration Rubric (San Diego State University) 24
Dance Rubric (University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee) 25
VALUE Rubrics 27
*Rubrics were taken verbatim from websites and were sometimes lightly reformatted to fit the
printed page.

13
Writing Rubric
Johnson Community College, downloaded 12/22/04 from
http://www.jccc.net/home/depts/6111/site/assmnt/cogout/comwrite
6 = Essay demonstrates excellent composition skills including a clear and thought-provoking thesis,
appropriate and effective organization, lively and convincing supporting materials, effective diction
and sentence skills, and perfect or near perfect mechanics including spelling and punctuation. The
writing perfectly accomplishes the objectives of the assignment.
5 = Essay contains strong composition skills including a clear and thought-provoking thesis, although
development, diction, and sentence style may suffer minor flaws. Shows careful and acceptable use of
mechanics. The writing effectively accomplishes the goals of the assignment.
4 = Essay contains above average composition skills, including a clear, insightful thesis, although
development may be insufficient in one area and diction and style may not be consistently clear and
effective. Shows competence in the use of mechanics. Accomplishes the goals of the assignment with
an overall effective approach.
3 = Essay demonstrates competent composition skills including adequate development and organization,
although the development of ideas may be trite, assumptions may be unsupported in more than one
area, the thesis may not be original, and the diction and syntax may not be clear and effective.
Minimally accomplishes the goals of the assignment.
2 = Composition skills may be flawed in either the clarity of the thesis, the development, or organization.
Diction, syntax, and mechanics may seriously affect clarity. Minimally accomplishes the majority of
the goals of the assignment.
1 = Composition skills may be flawed in two or more areas. Diction, syntax, and mechanics are
excessively flawed. Fails to accomplish the goals of the assignment.
Revised October 2003

14
Writing Rubric (FIPSE Project) Retrieved August 28, 2008 from http://web.roanoke.edu/Documents/Writing%20Rubrics.July%2007.doc
Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced
Ideas Shows minimal engagement
with the topic, failing to
recognize multiple
dimensions/ perspectives;
lacking even basic
observations
Shows some engagement with
the topic without elaboration;
offers basic observations but
rarely original insight
Demonstrates engagement
with the topic, recognizing
multiple dimensions and/or
perspectives; offers some
insight
Demonstrates engagement
with the topic, recognizing
multiple dimensions and/or
perspectives with elaboration
and depth; offers considerable
insight
Focus and
Thesis
Paper lacks focus and/or a
discernible thesis.
Some intelligible ideas, but
thesis is weak, unclear, or too
broad.
Identifiable thesis
representing adequate
understanding of the assigned
topic; minimal irrelevant
material
Clear, narrow thesis
representing full
understanding of the
assignment; every word
counts
Evidence Little to no evidence Some evidence but not
enough to develop argument
in unified way. Evidence may
be inaccurate, irrelevant, or
inappropriate for the purpose
of the essay
Evidence accurate, well
documented, and relevant, but
not complete, well integrated,
and/or appropriate for the
purpose of the essay
Evidence is relevant, accurate,
complete, well integrated,
well documented, and
appropriate for the purpose of
the essay.
Organization Organization is missing both
overall and within paragraphs.
Introduction and conclusion
may be lacking or illogical.
Organization, overall and/or
within paragraphs, is
formulaic or occasionally
lacking in coherence; few
evident transitions.
may lack logic.
Few organizational problems
on any of the 3 levels (overall,
paragraph, transitions).
are effectively related to the
whole.
Organization is logical and
appropriate to assignment;
paragraphs are well-developed
and appropriately divided;
ideas linked with smooth and
effective transitions.
are effectively related to the
whole.
Style and
Mechanics
Multiple and serious errors of
sentence structure; frequent
errors in spelling and
capitalization; intrusive and/or
inaccurate punctuation such
that communication is
hindered. Proofreading not
evident.
Sentences show errors of
structure and little or no
variety; many errors of
punctuation, spelling and/or
capitalization. Errors interfere
with meaning in places.
Careful proofreading not
evident.
Effective and varied
sentences; some errors in
sentence construction; only
occasional punctuation,
spelling and/or capitalization
errors.
Each sentence structured
effectively, powerfully; rich,
well-chosen variety of
sentence styles and length;
virtually free of punctuation,
spelling, capitalization errors.

15
Writing Rubric
Northeastern Illinois University
(adapted from: Barbara Walvoord, Winthrop Univ., Virginia Community College System, Univ. of Washington)
Quality
Criteria
No/Limited
Proficiency
Some Proficiency Proficiency High Proficiency (Rating)
1. Thesis/Focus:
(a) Originality
Thesis is missing Thesis may be obvious or
unimaginative
Thesis is somewhat
original
Develops fresh insight that
challenges the reader’s
thinking;
2. Thesis/Focus:
(b) Clarity
Reader cannot determine
thesis & purpose OR
thesis has no relation to
the writing task
Thesis and purpose are
somewhat vague OR only
loosely related to the writing
task
fairly clear and match the
writing task
clear to the reader; closely
match the writing task
3. Organization Unclear organization OR
organizational plan is
inappropriate to thesis.
No transitions
Some signs of logical
organization. May have
abrupt or illogical shifts &
ineffective flow of ideas
Organization supports
thesis and purpose.
Transitions are mostly
appropriate. Sequence of
ideas could be improved
Fully & imaginatively
supports thesis & purpose.
Sequence of ideas is
effective. Transitions are
effective
4. Support/
Reasoning
(a) Ideas
(b) Details
Offers simplistic,
undeveloped, or cryptic
support for the ideas.
Inappropriate or off-topic
generalizations, faulty
assumptions, errors of
fact
Offers somewhat obvious
support that may be too
broad. Details are too general,
not interpreted, irrelevant to
thesis, or inappropriately
repetitive
Offers solid but less
original reasoning.
Assumptions are not
always recognized or
made explicit. Contains
some appropriate details
or examples
Substantial, logical, &
concrete development of
ideas. Assumptions are
made explicit. Details are
germane, original, and
convincingly interpreted
5. Use of
sources/
Documentation
Neglects important
sources. Overuse of
quotations or paraphrase
to substitute writer’s own
ideas. (Possibly uses
source material without
acknowledgement.)
Uses relevant sources but
lacks in variety of sources
and/or the skillful
combination of sources.
Quotations & paraphrases
may be too long and/or
inconsistently referenced
Uses sources to support,
extend, and inform, but
not substitute writer’s
own development of idea.
Doesn’t overuse quotes,
but may not always
conform to required style
manual
Uses sources to support,
extend, and inform, but not
substitute writer’s own
development of idea.
Combines material from a
variety of sources, incl.
pers. observation, scientific
data, authoritative
testimony. Doesn’t overuse
quotes.
http://www.neiu.edu/~neassess/gened.htm#rubric

16
General Education Scoring Guide for Integrative Science
Scoring Level Science and Society
Basic Concepts and
Fundamental
Principles
Scientific Approach Nature of Science
4 - Accomplished Develops and defends an
informed position,
integrating values,
science, and technology.
Integrates and applies
basic scientific
concepts and
principles.
Demonstrates
comprehension of the
scientific approach;
illustrates with examples
Demonstrates scientific
reasoning across multiple
disciplines.
3 - Competent Correctly describes
perspectives concerning
the scientific aspects of a
societal issue.
Shows clear
comprehension of
basic scientific
concepts and
principles.
Accurately expresses
concepts relating to the
scientific approach
Interprets and relates
scientific results in a way
that shows a clear
recognition of the nature of
science.
2 - Developing Recognizes the place of
science in human affairs,
but is unable to
communicate its roles.
Able to state basic
scientific concepts
and principles.
Uses vocabulary related
to scientific methods in a
rote manner or showing
simple conceptualization
Provides simplistic or
incomplete explanations of
the nature of science.
1 - Beginning Does not visualize a role
or need for science in
human affairs.
Lacks understanding
of basic scientific
concepts and
principles.
Shows minimal
understanding of
scientific methods
Does not distinguish
between scientific,
political, religious, or
ethical statements.
http://www.csufresno.edu/cetl/assessment/ (click on IBScoring.doc)

17
Research Process Rubric*
Beginning Novice Proficient Distinguished
Defining the
Topic
Student has no
research question.
Teacher has to supply
question.
Basic, essential question is
vague. Related questions do
not help answer basic
question. Student knows
general subject matter to be
searched.
Essential question is focused and clear.
Student knows some related concepts for
his topic. Most related questions focus
topic.
Essential question is clear, complete, and
requires critical thinking skills. Related
questions focus topic accurately.
Collecting
Information
Student looses focus.
Information is not
accurate or complete.
Student uses the minimal
number of sources.
Information, though
interesting, frequently does
not relate to questions.
Student efficiently determines the
appropriate sources for information and
uses multiple, varied sources. Most
information relates directly to the
questions.
Student utilizes a variety of resources and
only the information that answers the
essential question is used. Search
strategies are revised as information is
located or could not be found.
Evaluating
Sources
Only one type of
source is used. Little
effort is made to
determine validity of
source.
Two or more types of
sources are used. Student
recognizes who is authoring
the information.
Multiple types of sources are used and
reflect support of the essential and related
questions. The scope, authority and
currency of the information are taken into
account.
Diverse sources are used and reflect
support of the essential questions. Student
compares information from at least 2
sources for accuracy, validity, and
inherent bias.
Extracting
Information
Product contains
missing details and
isn’t completely
accurate. Questions are
unanswered.
Product is not complete.
Only one related question is
answered. Student can
summarize information
source but misses some
concepts.
Product answers the questions in a way
that reflects learning using some detail
and accuracy. Student identifies key
concepts from the information source by
scanning and skimming.
Student assesses information in a
meaningful way and creates a product
that clearly answers the questions with
accuracy, detail and understanding.
Student determines if information
supports or rejects student’s thesis.
Citing
Information
Sources are not cited
properly.
MLA format is followed
although several errors are
apparent.
MLA format is followed. Student lists
most of the components in correct form.
MLA format is exact. No errors are
evident.
Reflecting
on Research
Student is
disorganized, does not
have a research
strategy and does not
use time effectively.
Student needs considerable
teacher help to organize
research. Some steps are
missing in the plan.
Student works within the time frame and
develops a system to organize
information. Requires some teacher help.
Time management skills are excellent.
Student develops a clear method to
organize information and makes revisions
in plan when needed.
*Retrieved December 30, 2006 from http://www.csd99.k12.il.us/NORTH/library/PDF/researchRubric.pdf

18
Levels of Investigation
Bowling Green University, http://folios.bgsu.edu/assessment/Rubrics.htm, downloaded March 21, 2002
“Investigate” calls attention to systematic processes of exploring issues, collecting and analyzing evidence, and making
informed judgments. Investigation quality for course assignments will be evaluated using the features defining the four
levels shown below.
Level 1 Investigation (Beginner)
 Questions and goal(s) of investigation not stated clearly or appropriately (e.g., may be too broad, superficial, specific,
and/or at a structural level)
 Few, inappropriate, or irrelevant sources reviewed for background information
 Review of background information does not aid in answering question(s) and goal(s) of current project
 Method of investigation not discussed or described poorly
 Strategy for analysis not outlined or outlined poorly
 Does not distinguish facts from opinions
 Offers basic description of background research, but no evaluation, conclusion, or extension of this research
Level 2 Investigation (Novice)
 Questions and goal(s) of investigation stated with sufficient, general focus
 Multiple sources (mostly relevant) used for background information
 Surface level of evaluation is offered, with only confirmatory (and no disconfirmatory) evidence to support ideas
 Method of investigation is described, but is flawed or unrealistic
 Strategy for analysis is discussed, but incomplete
 Facts are separated from opinions
 Reasonable but limited inferences and conclusions drawn from background information
Level 3 Investigation (Proficient)
 Questions and goal(s) of project stated explicitly, with appropriate focus
 Multiple relevant sources searched for background information
 Sufficient number of sources to provide a representative depiction of relevant background information
 Review of background information considers both confirming and disconfirming evidence
 Method of investigation sufficient to answer all research questions
 Analysis strategy is direct, competent, and appropriate
 Conclusions are based on the results of the analysis, as a logical extension of the findings, or demonstrating an
understanding of theory as well as how to apply it to current project
Level 4 Investigation (Advanced)
All of the positive features of proficient investigation, plus:
 Questions and goal(s) of investigation are original, reflecting an in-depth knowledge of content area, and consider an
issue(s) that previous investigations did not address
 Review of background information considers both confirmatory and disconfirmatory evidence of ideas, and refutes
competing explanations of findings
 Possible multiple methods of investigation sufficient to answer all research questions and reflects a sophisticated
understanding of investigative processes
 Analysis strategy has depth and may consider material from content areas outside of main focus of questions and
goal(s) of project
 Convincing conclusions are drawn from current investigation and generalizations to related areas are proposed
(demonstrates an understanding of theory as well as how to apply it beyond the current project

19
Levels of Presentation
Bowling Green University, http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/provost/Assessment/Present.htm
“Presenting” requires fluency not only in English or another language, but often also in other
symbol systems, such as logical, mathematical, visual, spatial, musical, electronic, or gestures and
movements. Speaking quality for course presentations will be evaluated using the features defining
the four levels shown below.
Level 1 Presenting (Beginner)
 Unfocused sense of audience
 Inadequate organization and/or development
 Inappropriate or insufficient details to support ideas
 Does not demonstrate understanding of topic beyond a surface level
 Looks only at notes or away from audience
 Vocal qualities (pace, inflection, volume, enunciation) distract from the content
 Lacks interest in the topic
Level 2 Presenting (Novice)
 Vague purpose or multiple purposes
 Sense of audience wavers
 Evident but inconsistent development
 Does not advance an argument with adequate support
 Demonstrates some understanding of the topic, but does make connections among ideas
 Little eye contact is made with audience
 Vocal qualities (pace, inflection, volume, enunciation) interfere with the content
 Shows some interest for the topic
Level 3 Presenting (Proficient)
 Expresses a clear, coherent thesis
 Sticks to the purpose and provides adequate transitions among ideas
 Moves beyond surface understanding and demonstrates facility with topical and disciplinary
knowledge and vocabulary
 Advances argument with sound evidence and references
 Appropriate eye contact is made with audience
 Vocal qualities (pace, inflection, volume, enunciation) support the content
 Shows enthusiasm for topic
Level 4 Presenting (Advanced)
 Insightful, creative or skillfully presented purpose
 Awareness of audience demonstrated through form, language, and presence
 Effective organization contributes to full development of presentation
 Innovatively or expertly advances the presentation with well-researched evidence and
documentation
 Eye contact is used to gauge reactions and understanding
 Vocal qualities (pace, inflection, volume, enunciation) reinforce and animate the content
 Creates enthusiasm about topic in others

20
Portland State University Studies Program Holistic Critical Thinking Rubric*
Inquiry and Critical Thinking Rubric
Students will learn various modes of inquiry through interdisciplinary curricula—problem
posing, investigating, conceptualizing—in order to become active, self-motivated, and
empowered learners.
6 (Highest)—Consistently does all or almost all of the following:
 Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
 Identifies the salient arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.
 Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view.
 Generates alternative explanations of phenomena or event.
 Justifies key results and procedures, explains assumptions and reasons.
 Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
 Makes ethical judgments.
5—Does most the following:
 Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
 Thinks through issues by identifying relevant arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.
 Offers analysis and evaluation of obvious alternative points of view.
 Generates alternative explanations of phenomena or event.
 Justifies (by using) some results or procedures, explains reasons.
 Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
4—Does most the following:
 Describes events, people, and places with some supporting details from the source.
 Make connections to sources, either personal or analytic.
 Demonstrates a basic ability to analyze, interpret, and formulate inferences.
 States or briefly includes more than one perspective in discussing literature, experiences, and
points of view of others.
 Takes some risks by occasionally questioning sources or by stating interpretations and
predictions.
 Demonstrates little evidence of rethinking or refinement of one’s own perspective.
3—Does most or many of the following:
 Respond by retelling or graphically showing events or facts.
 Makes personal connections or identifies connections within or between sources in a limited
way. Is beginning to use appropriate evidence to back ideas.
 Discusses literature, experiences, and points of view of others in terms of own experience.
 Responds to sources at factual or literal level.
 Includes little or no evidence of refinement of initial response or shift in dualistic thinking.
 Demonstrates difficulty with organization and thinking is uneven.
2—Does many or most the following:
 Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.

21
 Fails to identify strong, relevant counter arguments.
 Draws unwarranted or fallacious conclusions.
 Justifies few results or procedures, seldom explains reasons.
 Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or
preconceptions.
1 (lowest)—Consistently does all or almost all of the following:
 Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions, information, or the
points of view of others.
 Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counterarguments.
 Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view. Argues using fallacious
or irrelevant reasons and unwarranted claims.
 Does not justify results or procedures, nor explain reasons.
 Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason.
X—No basis for scoring. (Use only for missing or malfunctioning portfolios.)
*taken verbatim from Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2005). Introduction to Rubrics. Sterling,
VA: Stylus, pp. 122-123

22
Northeastern Illinois University General Education Critical Thinking Rubric
Downloaded 3/2/05 from http://www.neiu.edu/~neassess/gened.htm#rubric
Quality
Macro Criteria
No/Limited Proficiency
(D&E)
Some Proficiency (C) Proficiency (B) High Proficiency (A)
1. Identifies & Explains Issues Fails to identify, summarize, or
explain the main problem or
question.
Represents the issues
inaccurately or inappropriately.
Identifies main issues but does
not summarize or explain them
clearly or sufficiently
Successfully identifies and
summarizes the main issues, but
does not explain why/how they
are problems or create questions
Clearly identifies and
summarizes main issues and
successfully explains why/how
they are problems or questions;
and identifies embedded or
implicit issues, addressing their
relationships to each other.
2. Distinguishes Types of
Claims
Fails to label correctly any of the
factual, conceptual and value
dimensions of the problems and
proposed solutions.
Successfully identifies some, but
not all of the factual, conceptual,
and value aspects of the
questions and answers.
Successfully separates and labels
all the factual, conceptual, and
value claims
Clearly and accurately labels not
only all the factual, conceptual,
and value, but also those implicit
in the assumptions and the
implications of positions and
arguments.
3. Recognizes Stakeholders and
Contexts
Fails accurately to identify and
explain any empirical or
theoretical contexts for the
issues.
Presents problems as having no
connections to other conditions
or contexts.
Shows some general
understanding of the influences
of empirical and theoretical
contexts on stakeholders, but
does not identify many specific
ones relevant to situation at
hand.
Correctly identifies all the
empirical and most of theoretical
contexts relevant to all the main
stakeholders in the situation.
Not only correctly identifies all
the empirical and theoretical
contexts relevant to all the main
stakeholders, but also finds
minor stakeholders and contexts
and shows the tension or
conflicts of interests among
them.
4. Considers Methodology Fails to explain how/why/which
specific methods of research are
relevant to the kind of issue at
hand.
Identifies some but not all
methods required for dealing
with the issue; does not explain
why they are relevant or
effective.
Successfully explains
how/why/which methods are
most relevant to the problem.
In addition to explaining
how/why/which methods are
typically used, also describes
embedded methods and possible
alternative methods of working
on the problem.
5. Frames Personal Responses
and Acknowledges Other
Perspectives
Fails to formulate and clearly
express own point of view, (or)
fails to anticipate objections to
his/her point of view, (or) fails to
consider other perspectives and
position.
Formulates a vague and
indecisive point of view, or
anticipates minor but not major
objections to his/her point of
view, or considers weak but not
strong alternative positions.
Formulates a clear and precise
personal point of view
concerning the issue, and
seriously discusses its
weaknesses as well as its
strengths.
Not only formulates a clear and
precise personal point of view,
but also acknowledges
objections and rival positions
and provides convincing replies
to these.

23
Rubric for Assessing Information Competence in the California State University
ACRL Standard Beginning Proficient Advanced
1. Determine the
Extent of the
Information
Needed
Student is unable to effectively formulate a
research question based on an information
need.
Student can formulate a question that is
focused and clear. Student identifies
concepts related to the topic, and can find
a sufficient number of information
resources to meet the information need.
Question is focused, clear, and complete. Key
concepts and terms are identified. Extensive
information sources are identified in numerous
potential formats.
2. Access the
Needed
Information
Effectively and
Efficiently
Student is unfocused and unclear about search
strategy.
Time is not used effectively and efficiently.
Information gathered lacks relevance, quality,
and balance.
Student executes an appropriate search
strategy within a reasonable amount of
time. Student can solve problems by
finding a variety of relevant information
resources, and can evaluate search
effectiveness.
Student is aware and able to analyze search
results, and evaluate the appropriateness of the
variety of (or) multiple relevant sources of
information that directly fulfill an information
need for the particular discipline,
3. Evaluate
Information and
its Sources
Critically
Student is unaware of criteria that might be
used to judge information quality. Little effort
is made to examine the information located
Student examines information using
criteria such as authority, credibility,
relevance, timeliness, and accuracy, and
is able to make judgments about
what to keep and what to discard.
Multiple and diverse sources and viewpoints of
information are compared and evaluated
according to specific criteria appropriate for
the discipline. Student is able to match criteria
to a specific information need, and can
articulate how identified sources relate to the
context of the discipline.
4. Use
Information
Effectively to
Accomplish a
Specific Purpose
Student is not
aware of the information necessary to research
a topic, and the types of data that would be
useful in formulating a convincing argument.
Information is incomplete and does not support
the intended purpose.
Student uses appropriate information to
solve a problem, answer a question, write
a paper, or other purposes
Student is aware of the breadth and depth of
research on a topic, and is able to reflect on
search strategy, synthesize and integrate
information from a variety of sources, draw
appropriate conclusions, and is able to clearly
communicate ideas to others
5. Understand the
Economic, Legal,
and Social Issues
surrounding the
Use of
Information, and
Access and Use
Information
Ethically and
Legally
Student is unclear regarding proper citation
format, and/or copies and paraphrases the
information and ideas of others without giving
credit to authors. Student does not know how
to distinguish between information that is
objective and biased, and does not know the
role that free access to information plays in a
democratic society.
Student gives credit for works used by
quoting and listing references. Student is
an ethical consumer and producer of
information, and understands how free
access to information, and free
expression, contribute to a democratic
society.
Student understands and recognizes the concept
of intellectual property, can defend him/herself
if challenged, and
can properly incorporate the ideas/published
works of others into their own work building
upon them. Student can articulate the value of
information to a free and democratic society,
and can use specific criteria to discern
objectivity/fact from bias/propaganda.
*Prepared by the CSU Information Competence Initiative, October 2002, based on the 2000 ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards For Higher
Education. For more information, see http://www.calstate.edu/LS/1_rubric.doc.

24
San Diego State University Cabrillo Tidepool Study Collaboration Rubric
Retrieved January 3, 2007 from http://edweb.sdsu.edu/triton/tidepoolunit/Rubrics/collrubric.html
Beginning 1 Developing 2 Accomplished 3 Exemplary 4 Score
Contribute
Research & Gather
Information
Does not collect any
information that relates to
the topic.
Collects very little information--
some relates to the topic.
Collects some basic
information--most relates to
the topic.
Collects a great deal of
information--all relates to the
topic.
Share Information
Does not relay any
information to teammates.
Relays very little information--
some relates to the topic.
Relays some basic
information--most relates to
the topic.
Relays a great deal of
information--all relates to the
topic.
Be Punctual
Does not hand in any
assignments.
Hands in most assignments late.
Hands in most assignments
on time.
Hands in all assignments on
time.
Take Responsibility
Fulfill Team
Role's Duties
Does not perform any
duties of assigned team
role.
Performs very little duties. Performs nearly all duties.
Performs all duties of
assigned team role.
Participate in
Science
Conference
Does not speak during the
science conference.
Either gives too little information
or information which is irrelevant
to topic.
Offers some information--
most is relevant.
Offers a fair amount of
important information--all is
relevant.
Share Equally
Always relies on others to
do the work.
Rarely does the assigned work--
often needs reminding.
Usually does the assigned
work--rarely needs
reminding.
Always does the assigned
work without having to be
reminded.
Value Others' Viewpoints
Listen to Other
Teammates
Is always talking--never
allows anyone else to
speak.
Usually doing most of the
talking--rarely allows others to
speak.
Listens, but sometimes talks
too much.
Listens and speaks a fair
amount.
Cooperate with
Teammates
Usually argues with
teammates.
Sometimes argues. Rarely argues.
Never argues with
teammates.
Make Fair
Decisions
Usually wants to have
things their way.
Often sides with friends instead
of considering all views.
Usually considers all views.
Always helps team to reach a
fair decision.
Total

25
GENERIC DANCE RUBRIC ASSESSING SKILL DEVELOPMENT*

Use of Performance Skills
Novice
When performing basic locomotor and axial movement dancers show:
 undefined placement within spatial design
 limited response to rhythmic structure & tempo changes
 minimal range of dynamics and movement qualities
 sporadic concentration
Apprentice
When performing basic locomotor and axial movement dancers show:
 clear response to rhythmic structure & tempo changes
 moderate range of dynamics and movement qualities
 concentration & focus
Proficient
When performing moderately challenging movement, dancers show:
 Same as Apprentice
Advanced
When performing moderately challenging movement, dancers show:
 complexity and variety of spatial elements
 clear response to a variety of rhythmic structures & tempo changes
 broad range of dynamics and movement
 projected concentration & focus
Distinguished
When performing technically challenging movement, dancers amplify the composition by showing:
 projected artistic expression
 clarity of purpose
 sensitive stylistic nuance and phrasing
Use of Compositional Elements
Novice
In choreographing phrases, dancers show:
 minimal demonstration of the principles of space, time, and energy
 limited body movement
Apprentice
In choreographing phrases or pieces, dancers show:
 changes in use of space, time, and energy
 basic form of beg, mid, end
Proficient
In choreographing pieces, dancers show:
 purposeful approach to space, time, and energy
 forms such as ABA, rondo, canon, theme and variation
 personal expression & full body involvement
Advanced
In choreographing pieces, dancers show:
 complexity and variety of spatial elements
 forms integral to the expression of the piece

26
 full body movement that clearly expresses the choreographic intent
Distinguished
In choreographing pieces, dancers demonstrate sophisticated compositional awareness by showing:
 aesthetically effective use of space, time, energy, and form
 facility in use of abstract as well as literal expressions of a theme
 powerful, clear personal expression
*Rubric shared by Connie M. Schroeder, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee on the POD listserv,
April 14, 2008.

27
AAC&U VALUE Rubrics
These rubrics were developed for the Essential Learning Outcomes as part of the VALUE initiative (Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate
Education) of the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). More information can be found at
http://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics
The Essential Learning Outcomes
Beginning in school, and continuing at successively higher levels across their college studies, students should prepare for twenty-first-century
challenges by gaining:
Knowledge of Human Cultures and the Physical and Natural World
 Through study in the sciences and mathematics, social sciences, humanities, histories, languages, and the arts
Focused by engagement with big questions, both contemporary and enduring
Intellectual and Practical Skills, including
 Inquiry and analysis
 Critical and creative thinking
 Written and oral communication
 Quantitative literacy
 Information literacy
 Teamwork and problem solving
Practiced extensively, across the curriculum, in the context of progressively more challenging problems, projects, and standards for performance
Personal and Social Responsibility, including
 Civic knowledge and engagement—local and global
 Intercultural knowledge and competence
 Ethical reasoning and action
 Foundations and skills for lifelong learning
Anchored through active involvement with diverse communities and real-world challenges
Integrative Learning, including
 Synthesis and advanced accomplishment across general and specialized studies
Demonstrated through the application of knowledge, skills, and responsibilities to new settings and complex problems
Note: This list was developed through a multiyear dialogue with hundreds of colleges and universities about needed goals for student learning; analysis of a long
series of recommendations and reports from the business community; and analysis of the accreditation requirements for engineering, business, nursing, and teacher

28
education. The findings are documented in a series of AAC&U publications, including Greater Expectations: A New Vision for Learning as a Nation Goes to
College (2002), Taking Responsibility for the Quality of the Baccalaureate Degree (2004), Liberal Education Outcomes: A Preliminary Report on Achievement in
College (2005), and College Learning for the new Global Century (2007).
Included in this packet are the following rubrics:
Civic Engagement page 29
Creative Thinking page 33
Critical Thinking page 36
Ethical Reasoning page 39
Information Literacy page 42
Inquiry and Analysis page 44
Integrative Learning page 48
Intercultural Knowledge and Competence page 51
Oral Communication page 55
Problem Solving page 59
Teamwork page 62
Quantitative Literacy page 65
Written Communication page 69
Reading page 72
Lifelong Learning page 76
Global Learning page 79
The Introduction to each VALUE rubric begins with this statement:
The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts representing colleges and universities across the United States through a process that examined
many existing campus rubrics and related documents for each learning outcome and incorporated additional feedback from faculty. The rubrics articulate
fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment. The rubrics are
intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning, not for grading. The core expectations articulated in all 15 of the VALUE rubrics
can and should be translated into the language of individual campuses, disciplines, and even courses. The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position learning at all
undergraduate levels within a basic framework of expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared nationally through a common dialog and
understanding of student success.

29
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT VALUE RUBRIC
for more information, please contact value@aacu.org
Definition
Civic engagement is "working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values
and motivation to make that difference. It means promoting the quality of life in a community, through both political and non-political processes."
(Excerpted from Civic Responsibility and Higher Education, edited by Thomas Ehrlich, published by Oryx Press, 2000, Preface, page vi.) In
addition, civic engagement encompasses actions wherein individuals participate in activities of personal and public concern that are both individually
life enriching and socially beneficial to the community.
Framing Language
Preparing graduates for their public lives as citizens, members of communities, and professionals in society has historically been a responsibility of
higher education. Yet the outcome of a civic-minded graduate is a complex concept. Civic learning outcomes are framed by personal identity and
commitments, disciplinary frameworks and traditions, pre-professional norms and practice, and the mission and values of colleges and universities.
This rubric is designed to make the civic learning outcomes more explicit. Civic engagement can take many forms, from individual volunteerism to
organizational involvement to electoral participation. For students this could include community-based learning through service-learning classes,
community-based research, or service within the community. Multiple types of work samples or collections of work may be utilized to assess this,
such as:
• The student creates and manages a service program that engages others (such as youth or members of a neighborhood) in learning about and taking
action on an issue they care about. In the process, the student also teaches and models processes that engage others in deliberative democracy, in
having a voice, participating in democratic processes, and taking specific actions to affect an issue.
• The student researches, organizes, and carries out a deliberative democracy forum on a particular issue, one that includes multiple perspectives on
that issue and how best to make positive change through various courses of public action. As a result, other students, faculty, and community
members are engaged to take action on an issue.
• The student works on and takes a leadership role in a complex campaign to bring about tangible changes in the public’s awareness or education on
a particular issue, or even a change in public policy. Through this process, the student demonstrates multiple types of civic action and skills.
• The student integrates their academic work with community engagement, producing a tangible product (piece of legislation or policy, a business,
building or civic infrastructure, water quality or scientific assessment, needs survey, research paper, service program, or organization) that has
engaged community constituents and responded to community needs and assets through the process.
In addition, the nature of this work lends itself to opening up the review process to include community constituents that may be a part of the work,
such as teammates, colleagues, community/agency members, and those served or collaborating in the process.
Glossary
The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only.

30
• Civic-identity: When one sees her or himself as an active participant in society with a strong commitment and responsibility to work with others
towards public purposes.
• Service-learning class: A course-based educational experience in which students participate in an organized service activity and reflect on the
experience in such a way as to gain further understanding of course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of
personal values and civic responsibility.
• Communication skills: Listening, deliberation, negotiation, consensus building, and productive use of conflict.
• Civic life: The public life of the citizen concerned with the affairs of the community and nation as contrasted with private or personal life, which is
devoted to the pursuit of private and personal interests.
• Politics: A process by which a group of people, whose opinions or interests might be divergent, reach collective decisions that are generally
regarded as binding on the group and enforced as common policy. Political life enables people to accomplish goals they could not realize as
individuals. Politics necessarily arises whenever groups of people live together, since they must always reach collective decisions of one kind or
another.
• Government: "The formal institutions of a society with the authority to make and implement binding decisions about such matters as the
distribution of resources, allocation of benefits and burdens, and the management of conflicts." (Retrieved from the Center for Civic Engagement
website, May 5, 2009.)
• Civic/community contexts: Organizations, movements, campaigns, a place or locus where people and/or living creatures inhabit, which may be
defined by a locality (school, national park, non-profit organization, town, state, nation) or defined by shared identity (i.e., African-Americans,
North Carolinians, Americans, the Republican or Democratic Party, refugees, etc.). In addition, contexts for civic engagement may be defined by a
variety of approaches intended to benefit a person, group, or community, including community service or volunteer work, academic work.

31
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Civic engagement is "working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that
difference. It means promoting the quality of life in a community, through both political and non-political processes." (Excerpted from Civic Responsibility and Higher Education,
edited by Thomas Ehrlich, published by Oryx Press, 2000, Preface, page vi.) In addition, civic engagement encompasses actions wherein individuals participate in activities of
personal and public concern that are both individually life enriching and socially beneficial to the community.
Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance.
Capstone
4
Milestones
3 2
Benchmark
1
Diversity of Communities
and Cultures
Demonstrates evidence of
adjustment in own attitudes
and beliefs because of
working within and learning
from diversity of
communities and cultures.
Promotes others' engagement
with diversity.
Reflects on how own
attitudes and beliefs are
different from those of other
cultures and communities.
Exhibits curiosity about what
can be learned from diversity
of communities and cultures.
Has awareness that own
attitudes and beliefs are
different from those of other
cultures and communities.
Exhibits little curiosity about
what can be learned from
diversity of communities and
cultures.
Expresses attitudes and
beliefs as an individual, from
a one-sided view. Is
indifferent or resistant to
what can be learned from
diversity of communities and
cultures.
Analysis of Knowledge Connects and extends
knowledge (facts, theories,
etc.) from one's own
academic study/
field/discipline to civic
engagement and to one's own
participation in civic life,
politics, and government.
Analyzes knowledge (facts,
theories, etc.) from one's own
academic
study/field/discipline making
relevant connections to civic
engagement and to one's own
Begins to connect knowledge
(facts, theories, etc.) from
one's own academic
study/field/discipline to civic
engagement and to tone's own
Begins to identify knowledge
(facts, theories, etc.) from
one's own academic
study/field/discipline that is
relevant to civic engagement
and to one's own participation
in civic life, politics, and
government.
Civic-Identity and
Commitment
Provides evidence of
experience in civic
engagement activities and
describes what she/he has
learned about her or himself
as it relates to a reinforced
and clarified sense of civic
identity and continued
commitment to public action.
Provides evidence of
experience in civic
describes what she/he has
learned about her or himself
as it relates to a growing
sense of civic-identity and
commitment.
Evidence suggests
involvement in civic
engagement activities is
generated from expectations
or course requirements rather
than from a sense of civic-
identity.
Provides little evidence of
her/his experience in civic-
does not connect experiences
to civic-identity.
Civic Communication Tailors communication
strategies to effectively
Effectively communicates in
civic context, showing ability
Communicates in civic
context, showing ability to do
Communicates in civic
context, showing ability to do

32
express, listen, and adapt to
others to establish
relationships to further civic
action
to do all of the following:
express, listen and adapt ideas
and messages based on
others' perspectives.
more than one of the
following: express, listen and
adapt ideas and messages
based on others' perspectives.
one of the following: express,
listen and adapt ideas and
messages based on others'
perspectives.
Civic Action and Reflection Demonstrates independent
experience and
shows initiative in team
leadership of complex or
multiple civic engagement
activities, accompanied by
reflective insights or analysis
about the aims and
accomplishments of one’s
actions.
Demonstrates independent
experience and team
leadership of civic action,
with reflective insights or
analysis about the aims and
accomplishments of one’s
actions.
Has clearly participated in
civically-focused actions and
begins to reflect or describe
how these actions may
benefit individual(s) or
communities.
Has experimented with some
civic activities but shows
little internalized
understanding of its aims or
effects and little commitment
to future action.
Civic Contexts/Structures Demonstrates ability and
commitment to
collaboratively work across
and within community
contexts and structures to
achieve a civic aim.
Demonstrates ability and
commitment to work actively
within community contexts
and structures to achieve a
civic aim.
Demonstrates experience
identifying intentional ways
to participate in civic
contexts
and structures.
Experiments with civic
contexts and structures, tries
out a few to see what fits.

33
CREATIVE THINKING VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Creative thinking is both the capacity to combine or synthesize existing ideas, images, or expertise in original ways and the experience of thinking, reacting, and
working in an imaginative way characterized by a high degree of innovation, divergent thinking, and risk taking.
Framing Language
Creative thinking, as it is fostered within higher education, must be distinguished from less focused types of creativity such as, for example, the creativity exhibited
by a small child’s drawing, which stems not from an understanding of connections, but from an ignorance of boundaries. Creative thinking in higher education can
only be expressed productively within a particular domain. The student must have a strong foundation in the strategies and skills of the domain in order to make
connections and synthesize. While demonstrating solid knowledge of the domain's parameters, the creative thinker, at the highest levels of performance, pushes
beyond those boundaries in new, unique, or atypical recombinations, uncovering or critically perceiving new syntheses and using or recognizing creative risk-
taking to achieve a solution.
The Creative Thinking VALUE Rubric is intended to help faculty assess creative thinking in a broad range of transdisciplinary or interdisciplinary work samples
or collections of work. The rubric is made up of a set of attributes that are common to creative thinking across disciplines. Examples of work samples or
collections of work that could be assessed for creative thinking may include research papers, lab reports, musical compositions, a mathematical equation that
solves a problem, a prototype design, a reflective piece about the final product of an assignment, or other academic works. The work samples or collections of
work may be completed by an individual student or a group of students.
Glossary
• Exemplar: A model or pattern to be copied or imitated (quoted from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/exemplar).
• Domain: Field of study or activity and a sphere of knowledge and influence.

34
CREATIVE THINKING VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Creative thinking is both the capacity to combine or synthesize existing ideas, images, or expertise in original ways and the experience of thinking, reacting, and working
in an imaginative way characterized by a high degree of innovation, divergent thinking, and risk taking.
Capstone
4
Milestones
3 2
Benchmark
1
Acquiring competencies
This step refers to
acquiring strategies and
skills within a particular
domain.
Reflect: Evaluates creative
process and product using
domain-appropriate
criteria.
Create: Creates an entirely
new object, solution or
idea that is appropriate to
the
domain.
Adapt: Successfully adapts
an appropriate exemplar to
his/her own specifications.
Model: Successfully
reproduces an appropriate
exemplar.
Taking risks
May include personal risk
(fear of embarrassment or
rejection) or risk of failure
in successfully completing
assignment, i.e. going
beyond original
parameters of assignment,
introducing new materials
and forms, tackling
controversial topics,
advocating unpopular
ideas or solutions.
Actively seeks out and
follows through on
untested and potentially
risky directions or
approaches to the
assignment in the final
product.
Incorporates new
directions or approaches to
the assignment in the final
product.
Considers new directions
or approaches without
going beyond the
guidelines of the
assignment.
Stays strictly within the
guidelines of the
assignment.
Solving Problems Not only develops a
logical, consistent plan to
solve problem, but
recognizes consequences
of solution and can
articulate reason for
choosing solution.
Having selected from
among alternatives,
develops a logical,
consistent plan to solve the
problem.
Considers and rejects less
acceptable approaches to
solving problem.
Only a single approach is
considered and is used to
solve the problem.
Embracing Integrates alternate, Incorporates alternate, Includes (recognizes the Acknowledges (mentions

35
Contradictions divergent or contradictory
perspectives or ideas fully.
divergent or contradictory
perspectives or ideas in a
exploratory way.
value of) alternate,
divergent or contradictory
perspectives or ideas in a
small way.
in passing) alternate,
divergent, or contradictory
perspectives or ideas.
Innovative Thinking
Novelty or Uniqueness (of
Idea, Claim, Question,
Form, etc.)
Extends a novel or unique
idea, question, format, or
product to create new
knowledge or knowledge
that crosses boundaries.
Creates a novel or unique
idea, question, format, or
product.
Experiments with creating
a novel or unique idea,
question, format, or
product.
Reformulates a collection
of available ideas.
Connecting,
Synthesizing,
Transforming
Transforms ideas or
solutions into entirely new
forms.
Synthesizes ideas or
solutions into a coherent
whole.
Connects ideas or solutions
in novel ways.
Recognizes existing
connections among ideas
or solutions.

36
CRITICAL THINKING VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion
or conclusion.
Framing Language
This rubric is designed to be transdisciplinary, reflecting the recognition that success in all disciplines requires habits of inquiry and analysis that share common
attributes. Further, research suggests that successful critical thinkers from all disciplines increasingly need to be able to apply those habits in various and changing
situations encountered in all walks of life.
This rubric is designed for use with many different types of assignments and the suggestions here are not an exhaustive list of possibilities. Critical thinking can be
demonstrated in assignments that require students to complete analyses of text, data, or issues. Assignments that cut across presentation mode might be especially
useful in some fields. If insight into the process components of critical thinking (e.g., how information sources were evaluated regardless of whether they were
included in the product) is important, assignments focused on student reflection might be especially illuminating.
Glossary
• Ambiguity: Information that may be interpreted in more than one way.
• Assumptions: Ideas, conditions, or beliefs (often implicit or unstated) that are "taken for granted or accepted as true without proof." (quoted from
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/assumptions)
• Context: The historical, ethical. political, cultural, environmental, or circumstantial settings or conditions that influence and complicate the consideration of any
issues, ideas, artifacts, and events.
• Literal meaning: Interpretation of information exactly as stated. For example, "she was green with envy" would be interpreted to mean that her skin was green.
• Metaphor: Information that is (intended to be) interpreted in a non-literal way. For example, "she was green with envy" is intended to convey an intensity of
emotion, not a skin color.

37
CRITICAL THINKING VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or
conclusion.
Capstone
4
Milestones
3 2
Benchmark
1
Explanation of issues Issue/problem to be
considered critically is
stated clearly and described
comprehensively, delivering
all relevant information
necessary for full
understanding.
Issue/problem to be
stated, described and
clarified so that
understanding is not
seriously impeded by
omissions.
Issue/problem to be
stated but description leaves
some terms undefined,
ambiguities unexplored,
boundaries undetermined,
and/or backgrounds
unknown.
Issue/problem to be
stated without clarification
or description.
Evidence
Selecting and using
information to investigate a
point of view or conclusion
Information is taken from
source(s) with enough
interpretation/evaluation, to
develop a comprehensive
analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are
questioned thoroughly.
source(s) with enough
interpretation/evaluation to
develop a coherent analysis
or synthesis.
subject to questioning.
source(s) with some
interpretation/evaluation,
but not enough to develop a
coherent analysis or
synthesis.
taken as mostly fact, with
little questioning.
source(s) without any
interpretation/evaluation.
taken as fact, without
question.
Influence of context and
assumptions
Thoroughly (systematically
and methodically) analyzes
own and others' assumptions
and carefully evaluates the
relevance of contexts when
presenting a position.
Identifies own and others'
assumptions and several
relevant contexts when
Questions some
assumptions. Identifies
several relevant contexts
when presenting a position.
May be more aware of
others' assumptions than
one's own (or vice versa).
Shows an emerging
awareness of present
assumptions (sometimes
labels assertions as
assumptions).
Begins to identify some
contexts when presenting a
position

38
Student's position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis)
Specific position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) is
imaginative, taking into
account the complexities of
an issue. Limits of position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) are
acknowledged.
Others' points of view are
synthesized within position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis).
Specific position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) takes into
account the complexities of
an issue.
Others' points of view are
acknowledged within
position (perspective,
thesis/hypothesis).
Specific position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis)
acknowledges different
sides of an issue.
Specific position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) is stated,
but is simplistic and
obvious.
Conclusions and related
outcomes
(implications and
consequences)
Conclusions and related
outcomes (consequences
and implications) are logical
and reflect student’s
informed evaluation and
ability to place evidence and
perspectives discussed in
priority order
Conclusion is logically tied
to a range of information,
including opposing
viewpoints; related
outcomes (consequences
and implications) are
identified clearly.
Conclusion is logically tied
to information (because
information is chosen to fit
the desired conclusion);
some related outcomes
(consequences and
implications) are identified
clearly.
Conclusion is inconsistently
tied to some of the
information discussed;
related outcomes
(consequences and
implications) are
oversimplified.

39
ETHICAL REASONING VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Ethical Reasoning is reasoning about right and wrong human conduct. It requires students to be able to assess their own ethical values and the social
context of problems, recognize ethical issues in a variety of settings, think about how different ethical perspectives might be applied to ethical
dilemmas and consider the ramifications of alternative actions. Students’ ethical self identity evolves as they practice ethical decision-making skills
and learn how to describe and analyze positions on ethical issues.
Framing Language
This rubric is intended to help faculty evaluate work samples and collections of work that demonstrate student learning about ethics. Although the
goal of a liberal education should be to help students turn what they’ve learned in the classroom into action, pragmatically it would be difficult, if not
impossible, to judge whether or not students would act ethically when faced with real ethical situations. What can be evaluated using a rubric is
whether students have the intellectual tools to make ethical choices.
The rubric focuses on five elements: Ethical Self Awareness, Ethical Issue Recognition, Understanding Different Ethical Perspectives/Concepts,
Application of Ethical Principles, and Evaluation of Different Ethical Perspectives/Concepts. Students’ Ethical Self Identity evolves as they practice
ethical decision-making skills and learn how to describe and analyze positions on ethical issues. Presumably, they will choose ethical actions when
faced with ethical issues.
Glossary
• Core Beliefs: Those fundamental principles that consciously or unconsciously influence one's ethical conduct and ethical thinking. Even when
unacknowledged, core beliefs shape one's responses. Core beliefs can reflect one's environment, religion, culture or training. A person may or may
not choose to act on their core beliefs.
• Ethical Perspectives/concepts: The different theoretical means through which ethical issues are analyzed, such as ethical theories (e.g., utilitarian,
natural law, virtue) or ethical concepts (e.g., rights, justice, duty).
• Complex, multi-layered (grey) context: The sub-parts or situational conditions of a scenario that bring two or more ethical dilemmas (issues) into
the mix/problem/context/for student's identification.
• Cross-relationships among the issues: Obvious or subtle connections between/among the sub-parts or situational conditions of the issues present in
a scenario (e.g., relationship of production of corn as part of climate change issue).

40
ETHICAL REASONING VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Ethical Reasoning is reasoning about right and wrong human conduct. It requires students to be able to assess their own ethical values and the social context of problems, recognize
ethical issues in a variety of settings, think about how different ethical perspectives might be applied to ethical dilemmas and consider the ramifications of alternative actions.
Students’ ethical self identity evolves as they practice ethical decision-making skills and learn how to describe and analyze positions on ethical issues.
Capstone
4
Milestones
3 2
Benchmark
1
Ethical Self Awareness Student discusses in
detail/analyzes both core
beliefs and the origins of the
core beliefs and discussion
has greater depth and clarity.
Student discusses in
detail/analyzes both core
core beliefs.
Student states both core
core beliefs.
Student states either their
core beliefs or articulates the
origins of the core beliefs but
not both.
Understanding Different
Ethical
Perspectives/Concepts
Student names the theory or
theories, can
present the gist of said theory
or theories, and
accurately explains the details
of the theory or
theories used.
Student can name the major
theory or theories she/he uses,
can present the gist of said
theory or theories, and
attempts to explain the details
of the theory or theories used,
but has some inaccuracies.
Student can name the major
theory she/he uses, and is
only able to present the gist
of the named theory.
Student only names the major
theory she/he uses.
Ethical Issue Recognition Student can recognize ethical
issues when presented in a
complex, multi-layered (grey)
context AND can recognize
cross-relationships among the
issues.
Student can recognize ethical
issues when issues are
presented in a complex,
multilayered (grey) context
OR can grasp cross-
relationships among the
issues.
Student can recognize basic
and obvious ethical issues
and grasp (incompletely) the
complexities or inter-
relationships among the
issues.
Student can recognize basic
and obvious ethical issues but
fails to grasp complexity or
inter-relationships.
Application of Ethical
Perspectives/Concepts
Student can independently
apply ethical
perspectives/concepts to an
ethical question, accurately,
and is able to consider full
implications of the
application.
Student can independently (to
a new example) apply ethical
ethical question, accurately,
but does not consider the
specific implications of the
application.
Student can apply ethical
ethical question,
independently (to a new
example) and the application
is inaccurate.
Student can apply ethical
ethical question with support
(using examples, in a class, in
a group, or a fixed-choice
setting) but is unable to apply
ethical perspectives/concepts
independently (to a new
example.).
Evaluation of Different
Ethical
Student states a position and
can state the objections to,
Student states a position but
cannot state the objections to

41
Perspectives/Concepts assumptions and implications
of and can reasonably defend
against the objections to,
assumptions and implications
of different ethical
perspectives/concepts and the
student's defense is adequate
and effective.
and respond to the objections
to, assumptions and
implications of different
ethical perspectives/concepts
but the student's response is
inadequate.
of different ethical
perspectives/concepts but
does not respond to them (and
ultimately objections,
are compartmentalized by
student and do not affect
student's position.)
and assumptions and
limitations of the different
perspectives/concepts.

42
INFORMATION LITERACY VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
The ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively and responsibly use and share that
information for the problem at hand. -Adopted from The National Forum on Information Literacy
Framing Language
This rubric is recommended for use evaluating a collection of work, rather than a single work sample in order to fully gauge students’ information
skills. Ideally, a collection of work would contain a wide variety of different types of work and might include: research papers, editorials, speeches,
grant proposals, marketing or business plans, PowerPoint presentations, posters, literature reviews, position papers, and argument critiques to name a
few. In addition, a description of the assignments with the instructions that initiated the student work would be vital in providing the complete
context for the work. Although a student’s final work must stand on its own, evidence of a student’s research and information gathering processes,
such as a research journal/diary, could provide further demonstration of a student’s information proficiency and for some criteria on this rubric would
be required.

43
INFORMATION LITERACY VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
The ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively and responsibly use and share that information for the problem at hand. -
The National Forum on Information Literacy
Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance .
Capstone
4
Milestones
3 2
Benchmark
1
Determine the extent of
information needed
Effectively defines the scope
of the research question or
thesis. Effectively
determines key concepts.
Types of information
(sources) selected directly
relate to concepts or answer
research question.
Defines the scope of the
research question or thesis
completely. Can determine
key concepts. Types of
information (sources)
selected relate to concepts or
answer research question.
Defines the scope of the
research question or thesis
incompletely (parts are
missing, remains too broad
or too narrow, etc.). Can
determine key concepts.
Types of information
(sources) selected partially
relate to concepts or
answer research question.
Has difficulty defining the
scope of the research
question or thesis. Has
difficulty determining key
concepts. Types of
information (sources)
selected do not relate to
concepts or answer
research question.
Access the needed
information
Accesses information using
effective, well-designed
search strategies and most
appropriate
information sources.
Accesses information using
variety of search strategies
and some relevant
information sources.
Demonstrates ability to
refine search.
Accesses information
using simple search
strategies, retrieves
information from limited
and similar sources.
Accesses information
randomly, retrieves
information that lacks
relevance and quality.
Evaluate information and its
sources critically
Thoroughly (systematically
and methodically) analyzes
own and others' assumptions
and carefully evaluates the
relevance of contexts when
Identifies own and others'
assumptions and several
relevant contexts when
Questions some
assumptions. Identifies
several relevant contexts
when presenting a
position. May be more
aware of others'
assumptions than one's
own (or vice versa).
Shows an emerging
awareness of present
assumptions (sometimes
labels assertions as
assumptions). Begins to
identify some contexts
when presenting a position.

44
Use information effectively
to accomplish a specific
purpose
Communicates, organizes
and synthesizes information
from sources to fully achieve
a specific purpose, with
clarity and depth
Communicates, organizes
and synthesizes information
from sources. Intended
purpose is achieved.
Communicates and
organizes information
from sources. The
information is not yet
synthesized, so the
intended purpose is not
fully achieved.
Communicates information
from sources. The
information is fragmented
and/or used inappropriately
(misquoted, taken out of
context, or incorrectly
paraphrased, etc.), so the
intended purpose is not
achieved.
Access and use information
ethically and legally
Students use correctly all of
the following information
use strategies (use of
citations and references;
choice of paraphrasing,
summary, or quoting; using
information in ways that are
true to original context;
distinguishing between
common knowledge and
ideas requiring attribution)
and demonstrate a full
understanding of the ethical
and legal restrictions on the
use of published,
confidential and/or
proprietary information.
Students use correctly three
of the following information
use strategies (use of
citations and references;
choice of paraphrasing,
summary, or quoting; using
information in ways that are
true to original context;
and demonstrates a full
understanding of the ethical
and legal restrictions on the
use of published,
confidential and/or
proprietary information.
Students use correctly two
of the following
information use strategies
(use of citations and
references; choice of
paraphrasing, summary, or
quoting; using information
in ways that are true to
original context;
ethical and legal
restrictions on the use of
published, confidential
and/or proprietary
information.
Students use correctly one
of the following
information use strategies
(use of citations and
references; choice of
paraphrasing, summary, or
quoting; using information
in ways that are true to
original context;
ethical and legal
restrictions on the use of
published, confidential
and/or proprietary
information.

45
INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Inquiry is a systematic process of exploring issues, objects or works through the collection and analysis of evidence that results in informed conclusions or
judgments. Analysis is the process of breaking complex topics or issues into parts to gain a better understanding of them.
Framing Language
This rubric is designed for use in a wide variety of disciplines. Since the terminology and process of inquiry are discipline-specific, an effort has been made to use
broad language which reflects multiple approaches and assignments while addressing the fundamental elements of sound inquiry and analysis (including topic
selection, existing, knowledge, design, analysis, etc.) The rubric language assumes that the inquiry and analysis process carried out by the student is appropriate for
the discipline required. For example, if analysis using statistical methods is appropriate for the discipline then a student would be expected to use an appropriate
statistical methodology for that analysis. If a student does not use a discipline-appropriate process for any criterion, that work should receive a performance rating
of "1" or "0" for that criterion.
In addition, this rubric addresses the products of analysis and inquiry, not the processes themselves. The complexity of inquiry and analysis tasks is determined in
part by how much information or guidance is provided to a student and how much the student constructs. The more the student constructs, the more complex the
inquiry process. For this reason, while the rubric can be used if the assignments or purposes for work are unknown, it will work most effectively when those are
known. Finally, faculty are encouraged to adapt the essence and language of each rubric criterion to the disciplinary or interdisciplinary context to which it is
applied.
Glossary
• Conclusions: A synthesis of key findings drawn from research/evidence.
• Limitations: Critique of the process or evidence.
• Implications: How inquiry results apply to a larger context or the real world.

46
INQUIRY AND ANALYSIS VALUE RUBRIC
Definition
Inquiry is a systematic process of exploring issues/objects/works through the collection and analysis of evidence that result in informed
conclusions/judgments. Analysis is the process of breaking complex topics or issues into parts to gain a better understanding of them.
Capstone
4
Milestones
3 2
Benchmark
1
Topic selection Identifies a creative, focused,
and manageable topic that
addresses potentially
significant yet previously less
explored aspects of the topic.
Identifies a focused and
manageable/doable topic that
appropriately addresses
relevant aspects of the topic.
Identifies a topic that while
manageable/doable, is too
narrowly focused and leaves
out relevant aspects of the
topic.
Identifies a topic that is far too
general and wide-ranging as to
be manageable and doable.
Existing knowledge,
research,
and/or views
Synthesizes in depth
information from relevant
sources representing various
points of view/approaches.
Presents in depth information
from relevant sources
representing various points of
view/approaches.
Presents information from
relevant sources representing
limited points of
view/approaches.
Presents information from
irrelevant sources representing
limited points of
view/approaches.
Design process All elements of the
methodology or theoretical
framework are skillfully
developed. Appropriate
frameworks may be
synthesized from across
disciplines or from relevant
sub-disciplines.
Critical elements of the
framework are appropriately
developed however more
subtle elements are ignored or
unaccounted for.
Critical elements of the
framework are missing,
incorrectly developed or
unfocused.
Inquiry design demonstrates a
misunderstanding of the
framework.
Analysis Organizes and synthesizes
evidence to reveal insightful
patterns, differences, or
similarities related to focus.
Organizes evidence to reveal
important patterns, differences,
or similarities related to focus.
Organizes evidence but the
organization is not effective in
revealing important patterns,
differences or similarities.
Lists evidence but it is not
organized and/or is unrelated to
focus.

47
Conclusions States a conclusion that is a
logical extrapolation from the
inquiry findings.
States a conclusion focused
solely on the inquiry findings.
The conclusion arises
specifically from and responds
specifically to the inquiry
findings.
States a general conclusion
that, because it is so general,
also applies beyond the scope
of the inquiry findings.
States an ambiguous, illogical
or unsupportable conclusion
from inquiry findings.
Limitations and implications Insightfully discusses in detail
relevant and supported
limitations and implications
Discusses relevant and
supported limitations and
implications
Presents relevant and
supported limitations and
implications
Presents limitations and
implications, but they are
possibly irrelevant and
unsupported

4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen

4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen

Similar to 4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen